On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Jun Sun wrote: > That was the conclusion, but did not make to the CVS tree, probably due to > Ralf's unwillingness to take a overhead for "flawed" CPUs. What overhead? The code is conditional at the preprocessor level. > In my last patch for Vr41xx, I have a patch for this. Basically, I will send > a SIGSYS if the return value is a small negative. This will practically > satify all the need while keep the change minimum. The small modification to > the semantic is not too bad at all if you consider the original syscall > semantic is already badly broken. The default action for SIGSYS is to abort with a core dump, so it seems fine here -- I don't object. It allows us to use the normal return path, instead of that crude jump hack, too. Not that I particularly care about sysmips(MIPS_ATOMIC_SET) anymore... Maciej -- + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + +--------------------------------------------------------------+ + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
